« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
lei, most folks know pretty well. And may it not mean something like this in Paraclete ?—Let us take a little pains to examine.—We have already seen that the exhorter, the beseecher, the person who sets himself to comtort, uafowaXw. Now when a comforter sets himself to administer consolation to a person in distress—that is—mx^axxXttt, what does he do? Some, we know, after having sufficiently contemplated the nature of the sufferings of the afflicted person, begin with commiserating his or her affliction, and perhaps, acquiescing in the apparent justness of his or her complaint.—This we-call condolence.—After having sufficiently indulged the patient in his or her own way, the next step they take is, to endeavour to call the attention of the sufferer to some object befide the cause of his or her affliction. I do not recollect any word in our language which expresses this mode of proceeding on such occasions, strictly—to divert, does not; it is true, it means to turn away the mind from one thing, but not to fix it on another.—To paralogise would do better, if that word might be used in the same sense as to paraphrase: but unfortunately, the meaning of the preposition is a little different in these two words, and serves to shew that some attention is necessary in those who would not be paralogists but accurate paraphrasts. The Greeks have two words which express thrs drift of a comforter better—they are -napayo/tu and OT«f*/*tf9»»^«i.—The former is used by St. Paul, Col. iv. 11.—the latter is used by St. John, xi. 19. and is there, by placing the means for the effect, translated, to comfort. And ought not taapaxaJum, for pretty nearly the fame reason, to be understood as meaning the fame thing?—Let us fee.
When many of the Jews went to Martha and Mary, it i* not said that they were sent for—they appear to have gone without invitation. It is not indeed very likely that many would have been sent for. They came, as it is said, for the purpose of comforting, as it is also said, the sisters, or as the original more properly fays, »« tnafaiA.v^utrm avras. And how did they set about this? No doubt by suggesting such decent appropriate considerations as the sifters were likely jo be inclined to attend to, in order to call their attention off or aside from the cause of their grief, and to fix it on something else—Not improbably, by endeavouring to persuade them that Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom. However, we find that our Lord suggested this, on this or some other occ sion—and that he assured Mary of a resurrection. This attempt of the friendlv visitors to divert by appropriate suggeiiipns, alias to tail ajidc% the attention of the afflicted person, may,, at least, ... be be pretty nearly as properly expressed by the ward muftuui'tou as by vsxf3.fjivhofA.xt or *r*f*yoftv, the difference between the two former being not much more than this, that ra»f«f«'fleof»a» points out the means used a little more particularly.
If the above remarks concerning the meaning of the word vufaxaKtu, be accurate—and its true meaning be a calling of the rnind of any sufferer away from the cause of grief, to the contemplation of other objects—of course, we have no reason to restrict the meaning of the word to "the removal of those lesser evils, known under the name of inconveniences." The things placed before the mind of the sufferer to divert his attention from the cause of his grief, must, in order to be effectual, be in some degree of proportion to the cause of his suffering—and consequently may be even the joys of heaven, which indeed we find were actually placed before our Lord to encourage him "to endure the cross," &c. This, by the bye, serves to shew that though, as Mr. L. fays, "no one calls the bliss of heaven by the name of comfort," yet it may in the opinion of an Apostle be productive of comfort—and to all forts of sufferers, as they are exhorted by him, to run the race set before them, looking unto Jesus, who is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
In short—Had your correspondent, instead of reasoning from the ignorance of the Apostles rather than the omniscience of Christ, considered in what sense the Messiah himself had been a Paracletus, and how much more likely he was to have known what was to be the office of the Holy Spirit than the twelve were capable of apprehending—Had he, instead of having recourse to past and future events for information on this point, confined his attention to St. John's 4etailof the conversation—Had he, instead of having suggested the general obscurity of preceding prophecies, considered how few of those prophecies remained to be fulfilled, by the other Paracletus, or, to be cleared up by him, and how necessary, after all, the assistance of the Holy Spirit seems to have been to enable Christians to walk worthy of their vocation—Had he, instead oi confining his speculations to the apprehension of the Apofiles concerning prophecies to ^fulfilled, had recourse to the evidence of the epistles concerning the difficulty with which they were fulfilled—Had he, ipstead of taking it for granted that the office of a Paracletus was nothing more than to stand by to assist a neighbour when sent for, because the word is of passive signification and xa.\m means to call, only considered that the person calling him in may have bad various reasons for so doing" and
8 H a none none tnor* cogent than grief, and that, in such a case, fie would not have thought ot doing it if he had not been persuaded that the n*faiiA«To» was qualified votf****.TM, he would perhaps have stood a chance of saving himself a little unnecessary trouble,
I remain, Sir,
W. in the M. May 28, 1807.
P. S. After all, as the word Paracletus has a passive signication, and it seems therefore rather unlikely that the name should have been adopted on account of the active operations of the Holy Spirit, why should we not incline to think that it is of unusual import, and that the second and third persons in the Holy Trinity are each named a Paracletus, because they were prevailed on by the other two to undertake their respective offices—especially as we are assured that our Lord said "./ will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Paracletus?' Does not the total ignorance of mankind concerning the existence of those two persons,* prior to their being revealed, seem rather to suggest the necessity of having recourse to this interpretation?
•Of the Word it is said " the world knew him. not."— Of rh« Spirit of truth, it is said "Whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him."
ON THE INCREASE OF METHODISM.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S
YOUR obliging attention to my former letter encourages me to osier you some further remarks on the fame subject.
In addition to those m< tives of preference which I have already mentioned as likely to influence the lower classes, I would beg leave to point out to the attention of your readers, some other means practiced by Sectarists of gaining proselytes to their own persuasion. They not only compose, compile, abridge, and publish, but are ever intent on the dijlribution of religious tracts. I have by me copies of some of them, which denote by figures subjoined, that they have undergone a very numerous impression, and one of them in particular, indicates by example the various modes adopted of diffusing them among the people. Another means of gaining many proselytes, and much credit, is that of visiting and relieving the destitute sick. In time of sickness and distress we know that patients and those about them are best disposed to attend to religious discourse, and are apt to think favourably os a d ctrine inculcated by their benefactors. When I read in the report of a Society, which is said to consist, in a great measure, of Sectarists, that in the course of the year *8o6, relief was administered to 3030 sick poor, some of them labouring under loathsome and infectious distempers, many of them sinking under extreme wretchedness, I cannot but admire the zeal of those Samaritan's, and am inclined, after the dictate of our divine Teacher, to fay to every member of our Church, Go and do thou likewise. Far be it from me to call in question the purity of their motives; but I hope I may without a breach of Christian charity express an earnest; wish that our individual and collective labours might supersede the interference of Dissenters, by being thus indefatigably exerted in the care of souls, while the body languishes under disease. The unction of our divines, if less lenient, may prove equally sanative; and the spiritual food of their ministration if less relished, is equally wholesome, and restorative. Our clergy are ready . to attend when called for; and that they do not go unhid, may-, in many instances, be fairly ascribed to a visible disinclination on the part of ailing persons to serious discourse. Indeed in cases of dangerous illness, the sick of our communion are lamentably averse and dilatory. The attendants also, unwilling to create an alarm, carry their complaisance to the very brink of the grave, and lull their friend into a senseless, perhaps fatal, security. This absurd reluctance to prepare for death is most observable, I believe, in high and fashionable life. The most illiterate and irreligious seem not to think at all about the matter. Yet at so important a crisis we ought not to be
discouraged from visiting the indigent of every description, from inquiring into, and alleviating their distress, and soliciting the spiritual aid of some neighbouring clergyman, more especially the minister of the parish, who will, I am sure, assist and direct our benevolent endeavours to the best purpose—the cousolation of the afflicted—and the Salvation of the Soul.
Nov. 17, 1807.
ON THE BURIAL OF DEISTS AND DISSENTERS.
XO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN I
HAVING read a paper in the last number of your work, on the K" Burial of Deists and Dissenters," I take the liberty of addressing a few remarks to you on the subject, but more particularly as it respects the interment of the latter class.
As one concerned for the peace of society, I cannot but lament that your correspondent should hav« meddled with a topic of discussion, which one would have hoped had often and long ago been settled ; and which, as he has managed it, has a tendency to produce unpleasant effects, to the clergy of the established church themselves, as well as to some dissenters, should any of the clergy be influenced by his arguments.
Your correspondent considers Wheatley as an oracle, and is of his opinion, that " persons baptized among the dissenters can have no just claim to the use of the office os burial" by the church service ; as the rubric expressly declares that it is not to be used for any that die unbaptized, as those are supposed to do, who have been baptized by dissenting ministers.
On this matter, you will permit me to refer you to a few precedents, of the clergy having refused to perform duty in such cases, copied from a book now before me, entitled " An